In a brilliant article published by the NYT, one of the very few articles of the NYT that shed some favorable light on the current President of the United States, Paul Sonne describes how Trump's policies may end up having a destabilizing effect on America's traditional foes, and teaching them a scorching lesson.

Russia and the countries making up the so-called axis of evil (Iran, China, North Korea, Venezuela) wielded unchecked power in the world, gaining "geopolitical advantage for years by throwing around [their] power aggressively in global affairs and taking big military and intelligence risks".

What is happening is that now the "United States is basically saying, ‘We’re with you and we’re going to do the same things you’re doing,’" in the very same way you do them, just better.

I already noticed we live in a strange asymmetrical world, where the rule of law, peaceful coexistence, focus on productive investments, growth and welfare, and the search for win-win solutions in the international arena seemed to apply only to Western countries and their friends.

And, please, don't even for a moment try to cite Iraq, Afghanistan, and Gaza as examples that refute my observation. It took the invasion of Kuwait for Iraq, the protection afforded to al-Qaeda for Afghanistan, and October 7th for Gaza to push the West into action.

"For nearly 20 years, Mr. Putin has pushed for an end to a “unipolar world” dominated by Washington. But in a global arena without rules, where each nation tries to maximize its power, the United States in many ways towers over Russia. The power Mr. Trump has demonstrated" simply "cannot be matched by Mr. Putin".

I am not a fan of the Trump Presidency, and I have a distaste for narcissists. But I served in a NATO army (briefly), I gave my small, almost irrelevant contribution to the defeat of the Soviet Union and of the ideology that regime promoted, mostly by working hard, paying taxes and voting for pro-NATO and pro-defence spending parties.

And I have to admit one thing: The problem for Putin is that Trump is out-Putining him. Even better, he's doing it methodically and backed by military, intelligence, and diplomatic machines unmatched anywhere in the world. Not even close.

“This is kind of, ‘Be careful what you wish for,’” and it's stated clearly and without mincing words, so that Putin, Xi Jinping, Kim Jong Un understand it, and even by making an example of Maduro and Khamenei.

"An American president acting the same way benefits Mr. Putin, so long as they see eye to eye, but otherwise threatens to check his influence, because Washington’s global military and economic power outstrips that of Russia", by far.

"In the three weeks since the U.S. military attacked Venezuela and captured the nation’s president, Nicolás Maduro, Mr. Putin has yet to mention the Venezuelan leader’s name in public. When the United States seized a Russian-flagged oil tanker fleeing across the Atlantic this month, Mr. Putin said nothing.

The Russian leader stood aside last year when Israel and the United States conducted strikes on Iran, offering little more than a harsh statement."

Putin "vowed this month to defend Cuba’s sovereignty, after Mr. Trump cut off the island nation’s supplies of Venezuelan oil and said its government was “ready to fall.” It is unclear, however, if Mr. Putin would cross the White House to rescue the longtime ally of Moscow, particularly if Mr. Trump is still mediating Ukraine talks."
It is also unclear what Russia might actually do if Trump were to seize the island. Send a fleet that cannot even leave the Sea of Azov without being destroyed by Ukrainian drones?

In "a world where everything is about raw power, Mr. Putin must worry about Russia’s ability to keep up with [...] the United States." An undertaking I believe Russia has lost even before it began.

"From Venezuela to Greenland, Mr. Trump is seeking to increase American influence in the Western Hemisphere, but there is no sign he intends to stop there and cede Europe as Moscow’s zone of influence".

“There is nothing about spheres of influence in Trump’s thinking,” [...] “Basically, you get as much as you can defend.” And no country has the same defensive potential as the United States of America.

37 minutes ago, AndreasHG said:

And, please, don't even for a moment try to cite Iraq, Afghanistan, and Gaza as examples that refute my observation. It took the invasion of Kuwait for Iraq, the protection afforded to al-Qaeda for Afghanistan, and October 7th for Gaza to push the West into action.

What about iraq 2 ? The wmd lies and non existant connections to the boogeyman of the day.

4 minutes ago, blaze master said:

What about iraq 2 ? The wmd lies and non existant connections to the boogeyman of the day.

Sometimes small, harmless displays of displeasure have unpleasant consequences.

Left – In November 2002, members of the United Nations team of weapons inspectors walk over the mosaic of former US President George HW Bush [Awad Awad/AFP].

Right – An employee at the Al Rasheed cleans the hotel entrance in 1994 [Jamal Saidi/Reuters]

7 minutes ago, AndreasHG said:

Sometimes small, harmless displays of displeasure have unpleasant consequences.

Left – In November 2002, members of the United Nations team of weapons inspectors walk over the mosaic of former US President George HW Bush [Awad Awad/AFP].

Right – An employee at the Al Rasheed cleans the hotel entrance in 1994 [Jamal Saidi/Reuters]

You mean approx 1 million civilian deaths for a lie displeasure ?

3 minutes ago, blaze master said:

You mean approx 1 million civilian deaths for a lie displeasure ?

I mean that If you keep presenting yourself as an "unfinished job," you'll end up inviting someone to "finish the job."

And in any case, the point is that Trump is currently giving Putin a taste of his own bitter medicine. Not something that happened 20 years ago under a presidency followed by Obama I and II, Trump I, Biden, and now Trump II. Otherwise, we might as well start talking about Hitler, Napoleon, or Hitler and Stalin's concerted invasion of Poland in 1939 to justify Putin's crimes.

By the way, the 1 million deaths is a greatly exaggerated number, even including the Iraqis army casualties.

1 hour ago, AndreasHG said:

In a brilliant article published by the NYT, one of the very few articles of the NYT that shed some favorable light on the current President of the United States, Paul Sonne describes how Trump's policies may end up having a destabilizing effect on America's traditional foes, and teaching them a scorching lesson.

Russia and the countries making up the so-called axis of evil (Iran, China, North Korea, Venezuela) wielded unchecked power in the world, gaining "geopolitical advantage for years by throwing around [their] power aggressively in global affairs and taking big military and intelligence risks".

What is happening is that now the "United States is basically saying, ‘We’re with you and we’re going to do the same things you’re doing,’" in the very same way you do them, just better.

I already noticed we live in a strange asymmetrical world, where the rule of law, peaceful coexistence, focus on productive investments, growth and welfare, and the search for win-win solutions in the international arena seemed to apply only to Western countries and their friends.

And, please, don't even for a moment try to cite Iraq, Afghanistan, and Gaza as examples that refute my observation. It took the invasion of Kuwait for Iraq, the protection afforded to al-Qaeda for Afghanistan, and October 7th for Gaza to push the West into action.

"For nearly 20 years, Mr. Putin has pushed for an end to a “unipolar world” dominated by Washington. But in a global arena without rules, where each nation tries to maximize its power, the United States in many ways towers over Russia. The power Mr. Trump has demonstrated" simply "cannot be matched by Mr. Putin".

I am not a fan of the Trump Presidency, and I have a distaste for narcissists. But I served in a NATO army (briefly), I gave my small, almost irrelevant contribution to the defeat of the Soviet Union and of the ideology that regime promoted, mostly by working hard, paying taxes and voting for pro-NATO and pro-defence spending parties.

And I have to admit one thing: The problem for Putin is that Trump is out-Putining him. Even better, he's doing it methodically and backed by military, intelligence, and diplomatic machines unmatched anywhere in the world. Not even close.

“This is kind of, ‘Be careful what you wish for,’” and it's stated clearly and without mincing words, so that Putin, Xi Jinping, Kim Jong Un understand it, and even by making an example of Maduro and Khamenei.

"An American president acting the same way benefits Mr. Putin, so long as they see eye to eye, but otherwise threatens to check his influence, because Washington’s global military and economic power outstrips that of Russia", by far.

"In the three weeks since the U.S. military attacked Venezuela and captured the nation’s president, Nicolás Maduro, Mr. Putin has yet to mention the Venezuelan leader’s name in public. When the United States seized a Russian-flagged oil tanker fleeing across the Atlantic this month, Mr. Putin said nothing.

The Russian leader stood aside last year when Israel and the United States conducted strikes on Iran, offering little more than a harsh statement."

Putin "vowed this month to defend Cuba’s sovereignty, after Mr. Trump cut off the island nation’s supplies of Venezuelan oil and said its government was “ready to fall.” It is unclear, however, if Mr. Putin would cross the White House to rescue the longtime ally of Moscow, particularly if Mr. Trump is still mediating Ukraine talks."
It is also unclear what Russia might actually do if Trump were to seize the island. Send a fleet that cannot even leave the Sea of Azov without being destroyed by Ukrainian drones?

In "a world where everything is about raw power, Mr. Putin must worry about Russia’s ability to keep up with [...] the United States." An undertaking I believe Russia has lost even before it began.

"From Venezuela to Greenland, Mr. Trump is seeking to increase American influence in the Western Hemisphere, but there is no sign he intends to stop there and cede Europe as Moscow’s zone of influence".

“There is nothing about spheres of influence in Trump’s thinking,” [...] “Basically, you get as much as you can defend.” And no country has the same defensive potential as the United States of America.

Other nations believed that if they played nice, Putin would follow the rules. Now Trump has punched Putin in nose.

It was nice to see France follow this by seizing a Russian tanker.

9 minutes ago, AndreasHG said:

I mean that If you keep presenting yourself as an "unfinished job," you'll end up inviting someone to "finish the job."

And in any case, the point is that Trump is currently giving Putin a taste of his own bitter medicine. Not something that happened 20 years ago under a presidency followed by Obama I and II, Trump I, Biden, and now Trump II. Otherwise, we might as well start talking about Hitler, Napoleon, or Hitler and Stalin's concerted invasion of Poland in 1939 to justify Putin's crimes.

By the way, the 1 million deaths is a greatly exaggerated number, even including the Iraqis army casualties.

Who are you...usa...to determine what is an unfinished job. Also Iraq 2 had nothing to do with Iraq 1 or any unfinished business.

We were told it was for wmd.

35 minutes ago, blaze master said:

We were told it was for wmd.

I'm sorry if you were lied to 22 years ago. If I remember correctly, the same lie was told pretty much to everyone. But after 22 years it's time to move on and get over it.

3 minutes ago, AndreasHG said:

I'm sorry if you were lied to 22 years ago. If I remember correctly, the same lie was told pretty much to everyone. But after 22 years it's time to move on and get over it.

Pathetic reply.

Tony Blair in the UK Parliament ' his WMD

can be deployed in 45 minutes "

My POV only:

Trump as also the head of the DOD Hegseth, have not only treated Russia with kid gloves, but actively supported Putin's war through various actions like cancelling the delivery already promised weapons, ammunition and rockets for a half a year.

Or backholding intelligence information. Or suddenly deactivating Starlink.

The whole Trump administration don't want partnerships on equal terms.

I, ME and MYSELF is the reality.

Yes, Putin is keeping a very low profile, but isn't that because all he wants is victory over Ukraine? Putin is comfortable to trade anything in exchange for victory in Ukraine. Should Ukraine become the bone thrown to the dog (Putin)?

29 minutes ago, Schoggibueb said:

My POV only:

Trump as also the head of the DOD Hegseth, have not only treated Russia with kid gloves, but actively supported Putin's war through various actions like cancelling the delivery already promised weapons, ammunition and rockets for a half a year.

Or backholding intelligence information. Or suddenly deactivating Starlink.

The whole Trump administration don't want partnerships on equal terms.

I, ME and MYSELF is the reality.

Who benefits from prolonging the russia Ukraine war ?

6 hours ago, AndreasHG said:

"From Venezuela to Greenland, Mr. Trump is seeking to increase American influence in the Western Hemisphere, but there is no sign he intends to stop there and cede Europe as Moscow’s zone of influence".

There are predictions that the world will end up in 3 spheres of influence.

So USA Western hemisphere, then China eastern hemisphere.

Could be Europe under Russia the 3rd sphere. EU has depended on US military support, so they are too weak to defend themselves. So could likely happen. They get military protection, no more threats of being attacked by Russia, access to Russia's oil reserves ...

But then that would mean the end of wars, I'm guessing.

Unless the 3 spheres go after each other. But with each sphere having so much self-sufficiency and all the resources they need, it would be mass suicide for any of the spheres to attack another.

So once the dust of the geopolitical major realignments settle, there will be no more need for wars. Just a guess. I could be completely wrong.

10 minutes ago, blaze master said:

Who benefits from prolonging the russia Ukraine war ?

Donald Trump getting "donations" by his buddies.

11 minutes ago, blaze master said:

Who benefits from prolonging the russia Ukraine war ?

Weakens and destabilizes Russia.

So EU benefits.

NATO was formed to protect against Russian invasion.
But since Trump wants out of NATO, he also does not support that war and did try to end it.

1 minute ago, Schoggibueb said:

Donald Trump getting "donations" by his buddies.

Wrong.

Blackrock.

1 minute ago, save the frogs said:

Weakens and destabilizes Russia.

So EU benefits.

NATO was formed to protect against Russian invasion.
But since Trump wants out of NATO, he also does not support that war and did try to end it.

Blackrock.

Just now, blaze master said:

Blackrock.

how?

Trump is banning Blackrock from buying single family homes to try to keep the costs down.

But home ownership is a bit crazy anyway as stable jobs are disappearing.

6 minutes ago, blaze master said:

Wrong.

Blackrock.

Blackrock CEO: Larry Fink

Larry Fink: Buddy of Trump.

3 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

how?

Trump is banning Blackrock from buying single family homes to try to keep the costs down.

But home ownership is a bit crazy anyway as stable jobs are disappearing.

Infrastructure rebuilding. Its their new focus.

Disaster capitalism.

8 minutes ago, blaze master said:

Blackrock.

If Ukraine becomes part of Russia, russia becomes stronger.

If Ukraine becomes part of EU, EU is stronger.

hence all the financial and military support by EU for Ukraine.

EU has pumped over 90 Billion into supporting Ukraine.

2 minutes ago, Schoggibueb said:

Blackrock CEO: Larry Fink

Larry Fink: Buddy of Trump.

Larry fink......isn't that the same guy who supported Obama Clinton and Biden.

Hehehe you think Larry Fink gives a flying f about politics. Good one.

3 hours ago, save the frogs said:

There are predictions that the world will end up in 3 spheres of influence.

So USA Western hemisphere, then China eastern hemisphere.

Could be Europe under Russia the 3rd sphere. EU has depended on US military support, so they are too weak to defend themselves. So could likely happen. They get military protection, no more threats of being attacked by Russia, access to Russia's oil reserves ...

But then that would mean the end of wars, I'm guessing.

Unless the 3 spheres go after each other. But with each sphere having so much self-sufficiency and all the resources they need, it would be mass suicide for any of the spheres to attack another.

So once the dust of the geopolitical major realignments settle, there will be no more need for wars. Just a guess. I could be completely wrong.

Thanks to Putin's incompetent management, Russia is too poor to dominate Europe. It's GDP is around the same as Italy. It's an economic dwarf! 😀

Militarily, Russia can do nothing as long as there is a strong Ukraine army ready to intervene. It cannot fight on two fronts. That's one reason why Putin wants to reduce the size and strength of Ukraine's army.

3 hours ago, save the frogs said:

Could be Europe under Russia the 3rd sphere.

Comparing tiny Europe to Russia on a map gives the impression that Russia is so vast and likely so rich in natural resources that Europe is no match to it. But that is also true when comparing Alaska (665,384 sq mi) to Florida (65,758 sq mi) or to California (163,695 sq mi).

However, a strong military power must be supported by an equally strong economy. Otherwise, it cannot be sustained. Russia has a habit of pushing itself beyond its capabilities. But it also has a habit of failing miserably, experiencing traumatic regime changes and social unrest.

The EU economy is five times larger than the Russian economy. And this doesn't even count the UK, which alone has a GDP which is 70% larger than the Russian one ($3,694,543M vs $2,173,225M).

And if it's true that when we compare Russia to Europe economies in terms of purchasing power the gap is reduced sensibly, it is also true that when Russians go to China to purchase chips for their drones and missiles, Russia must pay them in tradable currency, and not in purchasing power parity.
This is to say that nominal economy matters, and still today matters a lot.

And then there is the demographic gap: the EU has a population of over 450 million vs Russia's 146 million.

When we think about Russia we tend to think about Moscow and St. Petersburg. We forget that only 13-15% of the Russian population lives in these two cities and 24% of the total population (roughly 35.5 million people) lives in the 16 largest cities. The remaining population lives in a vast, often underpopulated territory, often in conditions that, in the West, we would define as primitive.

Just like a strong military, good hospitals, quality schools, robust law enforcement, good public transports, roads, internet connections and public services, cost money and require a wealthy, productive and copious population to be able to pay for them.

Then there is also a cultural gap separating Europe from Russia, which is just as wide as the economic and demographic ones. Europe economic system is supported by a legal framework that has its roots in the Roman law, over 2,000 years old, which protects the citizens' individual freedom and private property.

Russia on the other end, despite numerous attempts to align itself with Europe, still regards private property with disdain, and individual freedoms with suspicion. The Russian culture and soul have been deeply influenced by the long Mongol domination.

Mongols were a nomadic population whose economy was built on two pillars: the common ownership of the land (all of it belonged to the head of state, the Kahn) and seasonal allocation of pastures to each tribe, not to individual shepherds.

When Mongols (nomadic shepherds) first interacted with their Russian subjects (farmers) they had to adjust a bit. But they still imposed the common ownership of the land and replaced the village to the tribe for the seasonal (annual, according to the agricultural cycle of sowing and harvesting) allocation of the land.

This gave rise to a collectivist agricultural economy, which undermined Russian productivity for over 200 years, giving rise to the most miserable peasant class on the entire European continent.

Even today, the many oligarchs who dominate the Russian economy own nothing. They manage immense wealth at the discretion of the reigning tsar (today it's Putin, tomorrow who knows), who can redistribute it in whole or in part, entrusting it to those closest to him or simply more understanding of the tsar's wishes.

Even today, Russians find it perfectly normal, like the sun rising in the morning and setting in the evening, for the tsar to decide to strip an oligarch of his entire wealth and assign it to others.

The oligarchs' goal is therefore essentially to extract as much wealth as possible from the resources granted to them on a temporary basis, and transfer the riches abroad to avoid the risk of confiscation.

This has led to a chronic underinvestment and lack of innovation, and has been going on for a millennium. And this explains why Russia has invented virtually none of the goods we live with every day (from cars to cell phones, from household appliances to computers, to modern factories, etc.) and is constantly lagging behind the West.

Given the above, is it possible for Russia to dominate Europe?

It has already happened in Eastern Europe, but it was only possible thanks to the critical assistance provided by the US and the UK during World War II.

After American and British assistance ended, the situation became progressively unsustainable, leading to the collapse of the USSR and its satellite regimes. It took approximately 50 years and staggering social, economic and cultural costs, but at the end the empire came crashing down.

The truth of the matter is that the tail may at times wag the dog, but not for long.

5 hours ago, save the frogs said:

Weakens and destabilizes Russia.

So EU benefits.

NATO was formed to protect against Russian invasion.
But since Trump wants out of NATO, he also does not support that war and did try to end it.

Therefore, the only possible rational conclusion is that the man who started the war (Putin), is proving to be a total idiot to continue it.

Isn't it?

5 hours ago, blaze master said:

Who benefits from prolonging the russia Ukraine war ?

Putin. Without 'victory' he could well fall from a high rise building.

45 minutes ago, AndreasHG said:

Therefore, the only possible rational conclusion is that the man who started the war (Putin), is proving to be a total idiot to continue it.

Isn't it?

The way the world works is: Eat or be eaten.

Unless you have a solution to world peace?

38 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

The way the world works is: Eat or be eaten.

Interesting observation. You've gone from lecturing us about complex geopolitical machinations to saying "it all comes down to the Law of the Jungle."

A truly remarkable feat.

May I ask how old you are? Are you of legal age yet?

10 minutes ago, AndreasHG said:

May I ask how old you are? Are you of legal age yet?

You don't think it's childish to say "Putin is an idiot"?

He's defending his back yard from predators.